linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH linux-next v2 1/3] platform/x86/intel/tpmi: Fix double free in tpmi_create

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <13cbbb1d-842d-819f-e57e-f6ec28ed73d0@hust.edu.cn>
Date:   Fri, 17 Mar 2023 19:57:05 +0800
From:   Dongliang Mu <dzm91@...t.edu.cn>
To:     srinivas pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Mark Gross <markgross@...nel.org>
Cc:     platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next v2 1/3] platform/x86/intel/tpmi: Fix double
 free in tpmi_create_device()


On 2023/3/17 18:23, srinivas pandruvada wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ...
> ...
>
>>> Hi Srinivas and Hans,
>>>
>>> How about folding these three patches into one patch and resend a
>>> v3 patch?
>>>
>>> This will get all people together and avoid the previous
>>> embarrassing sitation.
>> If I understand things correctly then patch 1/3 needs 3/3 to function
>> correctly, right ?
>>
>> I would not fold them together, smaller patches are easier to review
>> / understand, but maybe change the order and put patch 3/3 first? (so
>> make it 1/3) ?
> That should be correct order. The patch 3/3 should be the first.

Oh, yeah. The memory leak fix 3/3 should be the first. This is more 
reasonable.

BTW, I separated this memory leak fix due to that the kernel mainline is 
still vulnerable to this memory leak problem.

>
>> I can even do that when applying if you agree that is the better
>> order.
> Agree.
>
> Thanks,
> Srinivas
>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Hans
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>    drivers/platform/x86/intel/tpmi.c | 17 ++++-------------
>>>>>>    1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/tpmi.c
>>>>>> b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/tpmi.c
>>>>>> index c999732b0f1e..882fe5e4763f 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/tpmi.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/tpmi.c
>>>>>> @@ -215,8 +215,8 @@ static int tpmi_create_device(struct
>>>>>> intel_tpmi_info *tpmi_info,
>>>>>>             feature_vsec_dev =
>>>>>> kzalloc(sizeof(*feature_vsec_dev),
>>>>>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>>           if (!feature_vsec_dev) {
>>>>>> -               ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>>>> -               goto free_res;
>>>>>> +               kfree(res);
>>>>>> +               return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>           }
>>>>>>             snprintf(feature_id_name, sizeof(feature_id_name),
>>>>>> "tpmi-
>>>>>> %s", name);
>>>>>> @@ -242,17 +242,8 @@ static int tpmi_create_device(struct
>>>>>> intel_tpmi_info *tpmi_info,
>>>>>>            * feature_vsec_dev memory is also freed as part of
>>>>>> device
>>>>>>            * delete.
>>>>>>            */
>>>>>> -       ret = intel_vsec_add_aux(vsec_dev->pcidev, &vsec_dev-
>>>>>>> auxdev.dev,
>>>>>> -                                feature_vsec_dev,
>>>>>> feature_id_name);
>>>>>> -       if (ret)
>>>>>> -               goto free_res;
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -       return 0;
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -free_res:
>>>>>> -       kfree(res);
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -       return ret;
>>>>>> +       return intel_vsec_add_aux(vsec_dev->pcidev,
>>>>>> &vsec_dev-
>>>>>>> auxdev.dev,
>>>>>> +                                 feature_vsec_dev,
>>>>>> feature_id_name);
>>>>>>    }
>>>>>>      static int tpmi_create_devices(struct intel_tpmi_info
>>>>>> *tpmi_info)